Current Status and Reflections on the Protection of Chinese Citizens’ Internet Privacy Rights

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 99-106
Author(s):  
Ma Zhulin
Keyword(s):  
Current Status ◽  
Privacy Rights ◽  
Internet Privacy

The Second Internet: The Brussels Bourgeois Internet

2021 ◽  
pp. 77-91
Author(s):  
Kieron O’Hara
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Public Space ◽  
Data Protection ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Privacy Rights ◽  
General Data Protection Regulation ◽  
Internet Privacy ◽  
Data Protection Directive ◽  
General Data ◽  
Data Protection Law

This chapter describes the Brussels Bourgeois Internet. The ideal consists of positive, managed liberty where rights of others are respected, as in the bourgeois public space, where liberty follows only when rights are secured. The exemplar of this approach is the European Union, which uses administrative means, soft law, and regulation to project its vision across the Internet. Privacy and data protection have become the most emblematic struggles. Under the Data Protection Directive of 1995, the European Union developed data-protection law and numerous privacy rights, including a right to be forgotten, won in a case against Google Spain in 2014, the arguments about which are dissected. The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) followed in 2018, amplifying this approach. GDPR is having the effect of enforcing European data-protection law on international players (the ‘Brussels effect’), while the European Union over the years has developed unmatched expertise in data-protection law.

scholarly journals Judicial Jurisdiction over Internet Privacy Violations and the GDPR: a Case of ''Privacy Tourism''?

2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-38 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ioannis Revolidis
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Data Protection ◽  
Online Privacy ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Private International Law ◽  
The European Union ◽  
General Data Protection Regulation ◽  
Internet Privacy ◽  
Relationship Of ◽  
The Impact

This paper discusses the impact of art. 79(2) of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in international litigation over online privacy violations. The first part introduces the tendency of the European legislator to treat private international law problems in the field of data protection as isolated and independent from the traditional secondary private international law acts. The second part analyses the current status quo of international jurisdiction over online privacy violations according to Regulation 1215/2012. After briefly examining the eDate and Martinez ruling (joined cases C-509/09 and C-161/10), it concludes that the Court of Justice of the European Union has stretched the jurisdictional grounds of art. 7(2) Regulation 1215/2012 too far in order to afford strong protection to data subjects. In that sense, it raises doubts on whether art. 79(2) was necessary. Following this conclusion, it tries to explore the uneasy relationship of GDPR art. 79(2) with the jurisdictional regime established under Regulation 1215/2012. Instead of an epilogue, the last part tries to make some reflections on the impact of GDPR art. 79(2) in privacy litigation cases involving non-EU parties.

Employee Privacy in Virtual Workplaces

2011 ◽  
pp. 183-195
Author(s):  
Robert Sprague
Keyword(s):  
Communication Technologies ◽  
Legal Aspects ◽  
The Body ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Privacy Rights ◽  
Employee Privacy ◽  
Virtual Workplace ◽  
Privacy Law ◽  
Workplace Environments ◽  
Privacy Issues

This chapter addresses the legal aspects of employee privacy in virtual workplaces. The body of law regarding employee workplace privacy that has evolved over the years establishes a minimal expectation of privacy on the part of the employee (meaning employers have been found guilty of violating employee privacy only in rare and extreme cases). No one has yet examined whether virtual workplaces alter the fundamental assumptions underlying employee privacy rights. By reviewing the current status of employee privacy law and juxtaposing it with virtual workplace environments, with a particular focus on communication technologies, this chapter seeks to provide guidance for the privacy issues that are sure to arise with the growth and development of virtual workplaces.

Privacy Rights on the Internet: Self-Regulation or Government Regulation?

2006 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 323-342 ◽  
Author(s):  
Norman E. Bowie ◽  
Karim Jamal
Keyword(s):  
Government Regulation ◽  
Self Regulation ◽  
Policy Issue ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Privacy Rights ◽  
Privacy Regulation ◽  
Internet Privacy ◽  
Narrow Scope ◽  
Public Policy Issue ◽  
The Us

Abstract:Consumer surveys indicate that concerns about privacy are a principal factor discouraging consumers from shopping online. The key public policy issue regarding privacy is whether the US should follow its current self-regulation course (where the FTC encourages websites to obtain private “privacy web-seals”), or whether a European style formal legal regulation approach should be adopted in the US.We conclude that the use of assurance seals has worked reasonably well and websites should be free to decide whether they have a privacy seal or not. Given the narrow scope and the wide variety among these seals, we do argue that the seals should commit themselves to the key features of a good privacy policy and that an opt-in provision be required. We believe that insufficient evidence exists to propose formal Government mandated Internet privacy regulation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document